Starhawk General

[Phillyblunz]

Playing Starhawk last night I kept wanting to shoot up into the air with my grizzly.

Like an iron man suit, he would tuck his arms in beside him and so could not fire weapons while flying, but would be twice as fast as a hawk with engine mods, and maybe you could ram into hawks or other vehilces like a missile.  I would be ok if this was a murder/suicide type attack, actually I think many of the hawks current attacks should be murder/suicide attacks but that wont happen now. 

IMO the balancing issues were never hard to solve but LBI feared the response of the Warhawk old timers, which is funny because most of them still hate the game anyway, LOL.

That is what happens when you try to please too many people, you end up alienating most of them.

[Dark-Quaker]

Philly you have some good ideas.

Truthfully the only issue I had with WH was there was no sprint button.

Star Wars Battlefront II was a great game. I like the idea of character classes. How about vehicle classes?

Instead of one vehicle have an air to ground vehicle and an air to air vehicle. Make the air to air vehicle and weapons useless against ground targets and the reverse on the air to ground vehilces. I would also like to see a huge air ship, a big slow hulking gun ship that can seat many.

I like the build and battle system but how about each character class has a unique loadout. I would like to see more offensive loadout choices.

Here is a very unique idea, how about a water/navy element to the game? How cool would subs and ships be?

You could launch some HUGE artillery at the land structures.

[Dark-Quaker]

Also, more urban combat maps

[Phillyblunz]

Also add some G2A vehicles and I am on board.

That is one thing Starhawk sorely needed, the grizzly will do b ut is not ideal as it is kinda like a mobile flak turret.

If the grizzly had missiles which were like homers and could lock onto hawks that would have been all Starhawk needed, but of course I would have still asked that it be able to use shield and stealth and a G2A torpedo/clusters if the hawk needs to have these things.

The water vehicle idea was given in the beta but the devs never commented on it as far as I know.

Another thing many of us wanted was caves/tunnels which would force hawks to either land or enter an area not big enough to spin around like a headless chicken if they dared enter.

I really like the bridges you can go under, I wish every level had paths out of the bases like that.

On that note I had suggested a type of transit that would travel around the map inside a tunnel, you could get at least to the center of each map from the edge of your own base and would only be vulnerable to other troops who would have to get down there too.  This would have stopped base ravages from occuring almost entirely.

[Smart-Move]

Rubicon ur dumb , its called warhawk. Lbi listened to nubs like u dats y starflop failed

[Phillyblunz]

---

RubiconAlpha wrote:

My first suggestion for making a better Warhawk/Starhawk...

Leave Hawks out of the game completely.

Half of your balancing issues done away with right from the start.

That why I prefer hawkless loadouts.  Some/lots of the time these can be fun (If the pilots are actually gonna play the objective as well as fly) but the easiest way to ruin an entire match is when the cluster bombs and dive bombing flak-tards come in and mess things up.

When hawks are used a bit more sparingly it creates a match which suits my style of play much better.  I play ground and never feel the need to ride a single vehicle all round and never get out, I use everything a little bit, this is what makes the games varied and fun, not boring and repetative.  The only good part is these guys seem to get bored of the game as they only use a single aspect so they go away in time.  Not that we need less players, we just need less players like that IMO.  If the pure pilots would stick to pure flight modes everything would be fine IMO, but its easier for them to A2G and rack up high KDR's so of course that is what they do.

[gs94]

---

RubiconAlpha wrote:

My first suggestion for making a better Warhawk/Starhawk...

Leave Hawks out of the game completely.

Half of your balancing issues done away with right from the start.

Plus you won't have the two camps (ground pounders and pilots) fighting for control of the game and how the game "should" be played.

Or just give pilots "Gatekeeper" and "Dogfight" like modes and only have air vehicles for troop transport everywhere else.

Of all the game's problems, the two camps never really playing well with each other is the biggest issue both Warhawk and Starhawk had.

"Build and Battle" without more permanent structures and captureable bases are a close second.

---

No. Just no.

[RubiconAlpha]

---

Smart-Move wrote:
Rubicon ur dumb , its called warhawk. Lbi listened to nubs like u dats y starflop failed

---

hehe, I thought that would get that kind of reaction.

But seriously,  Sony did more to hurt it's sales than listening to people like me by lack of promotion.

LBI did themselves in by trying to please both Warhawk pilots and ground pounders and missing the mark on both counts. At least for the vast majority of Warhawk players.

That was my point. Without finely turned balance of all vehicles and weapons PLUS more permanent structures to fight from, this (and any new version of it) will never make everyone happy.

This debate is more than a year old now.

It would be smarter for Sony to drop the word "Hawk" from any future game and focus on what worked in both games. For me that has always been the ground game. Hawks and the fans of them have always played (for the most part) an entirely different role than the rest of the players.

Even with the added support of air cover (when you had some) the cons out weighed the pros since so much of the game forced you to deal with the air attack over everything else.

Make a third-person shooter like Warhawk and Starhawk's ground game and sell way more copies of both.

That's my opinion. I don't care if you or anyone calls it dumb. So far Sony can't seem to sell too many games when forcing both type of players to live with each other.

I'd suggest something different next time out.

[gs94]

Lol If you are looking for a 3rd Person Shooter, you should try Uncharted.

In the Hawk games, the main attraction is the Hawk vehicle. Its pretty dumb to get the game when you can just get a 3rd person tactical shooter, if thats what you are looking for.

[CRO_NOSM1-BUBA]

---

RubiconAlpha wrote:

My first suggestion for making a better Warhawk/Starhawk...

Leave Hawks out of the game completely.

---

I wanted to make a thread about this for a while, a vision of the "Hawk" series without the Hawk (more so in respect to Starhawk). Maybe in some time.